Smoked Porter - Stone Brewing Co.

Not Rated.
Smoked PorterSmoked Porter

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
90
outstanding

1,770 Reviews
THE BROS
90
outstanding

(Read More)
Reviews: 1,770
Hads: 4,001
rAvg: 4.04
pDev: 9.41%
Wants: 160
Gots: 410 | FT: 2
Brewed by:
Stone Brewing Co. visit their website
California, United States

Style | ABV
American Porter |  5.90% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: kbub6f on 03-18-2002

No notes at this time.
Beer: Reviews & Ratings
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Smoked Porter Alström Bros
Reviews: 1,770 | Hads: 4,001
Photo of beerkittycat
3.4/5  rDev -15.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Appearance is an inky black brown with a thin but frothy tan head. Aroma has only faint notes of campfire smoke and a little roast malt, and no hop aroma. Taste has some nice flavors of roast and black malts with notes of dark bitter chocolate, licorice, coffee, and yes, some faint smoke. Moderate hop bitterness actually left a mild tang on my tongue but the semi-sweetness of the malt balanced it nicely. Some faint but interesting grassy and lemongrass-like hop flavor. I felt that the mouthfeel was a tad thin for a porter but it was rather drinkable for that reason. This was a decent beer, don't get me wrong, but there definately was a lack of boldness for this style in the mouthfeel, the hop bitterness/flavor/aroma, and especially with the smoke flavor and aroma. Maybe because Stone makes such awesome beers I was expecting more. Still, a worthy beer for consumption. (879 characters)

Photo of BarryMFBurton
3.4/5  rDev -15.8%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

I am definitely on a Stone kick at the moment. For good reason though – they make great beer. Here we have their Smoked Porter, which I haven’t really heard about. I have high expectations for it, though, due to the fact that Stone makes my favorite brews (and because it was $7+ for the bomber). Here it goes:

A: Dark coffee brown. A hint of light comes through, showing amber undertones. A thick, dark tan head rises large, covering a good 3+ fingers off the pour. Sticky lacing stays all around the glass to the last drink.

S: Surprisingly fruity – something cooked, though, like a baked apple. Sweet caramel and chocolate dominate the nose after, giving this stout an inviting presence even before the first drink.

T: Hmmmm. Much different than the nose. The yeasty breads are what hit you first, giving that chewy biscuit tone. This sets the stage for a big, smoky hit of roasted malts. This is where it falls short, in my opinion. The smokiness is there, but restrained (especially when you consider that this is called “Smoked Porter”). Chocolate and milky mocha tones soon take charge, leaving the smoke of the palate as relatively forgettable. The fruit that I felt in the nose comes in the form of the hoppy finish – hints of candied grapes and apples (and all things caramelized, for that matter). Not bad, but not great.

M: To be honest, it’s a bit watery for a porter. Maybe it’s because it’s 5.9% ABV, but its thin nature doesn’t sit well with me. It’s not terrible – I would have expected better from the Stone boys, though.

O: Well, it’s my least favorite Stone offering so far – that’s not to say it’s a terrible beer, though. Comparing Stone beers is like comparing the Indiana Jones movies: they’re all good in their own special way, but still, some are just not great. For now, I’ll stick to IRS and Oaked AB for my Stone brews of choice. (1,899 characters)

Photo of emmasdad
3.4/5  rDev -15.8%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

Pours from the bomber a nice medium black color, with some decent light brown foam on top. Aromas of smoke, roasted malt and dark chocolate. Some dark fruits on the palate, maybe cherries, figs and plums, along with the ever present smoke. Solid, but not my favorite. (267 characters)

Photo of wanker
3.4/5  rDev -15.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

If you are expecting the smokiness of a rauchbier you will be disappointed. This is your basic porter, with a hint of smokiness. The smokiness is there, but it is quite subdued.

It was tasty, and I'd certainly drink it again, but it was neither my favorite porter nor a particularly smoky beer. (295 characters)

Photo of Knuckles
3.4/5  rDev -15.8%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

I always feel like Flavor Flav whenever I review a beer from Stone, as I continually want to shout, "Don't believe the hype!" Now, mind you, I'm not opposed to Stone and the things they brew, I'm just not a card-carrying member of the "Stone = Great Beer" club. I'm a Doubting Knuckles, or some damn thing. What I continually find is that they brew some very decent beers, but try as I might, I just don't love them (although I will admit to liking the RIS, and want to cellar a bottle at some point). The Smoked Porter is yet another one of those beers that I wanted to like, but ultimately found lacking.

It suffers greatly, in my opinion, from the fact that most beer drinkers are going to compare it to the Alaskan Smoked Porter. And if they do, they will be sorely disappointed. This beer is a much more traditional porter in terms of color, ABV, and flavor profile than the AK.

Appearance: Held up to the light, this beer is a gorgeous, deep ruby (note to self: come up with a different color than 'ruby'. You use it to goddam much.), and pours with the always popular espresso creme head. I get about three fingers of foam, that linger for about ten minutes or so, and then slowly fade away. My only real complaint with the beer is that it is filtered. Don't axe me why, but I do love the look of an unfiltered porter. It makes me feel so Victorian.

Smell: The nose is actually the only place I get any hint of smoke, and it is very, very pleasant. Starts off with a deep, malty nose, and then finishes up smoky. Very nice.

Taste: As a smoked porter (and actually, as a porter), this one really drops the ball in my opinion. I was actually a little surprised by it, as it was a fairly one-note beer. The peat smoke that is supposed to be prominent was almost non-existent in this bottle, and contrary to it's 5.9% ABV, it had an incredibly malty palate. Once it warmed up it got a little smokier, but not nearly enough for me.

Mouthfeel: Again, somewhat in contrast to the maltiness of the beer itself, it was rather thin in mouthfeel. I wanted it to be a little richer in texture to balance out the flavors, and it just wasn't.

Drinkability: Honest, I really want to find a Stone beer that I like so I can write really nice things about it, if only to give the impression that I'm not a blanket Stone hata. But the sad truth is (so far, anyway), that for my palate, their beers lack balance. That lack of balance seriously affects the drinkability in my opinion, and this beer is no exception to that rule. It is not a bad beer by any stretch of the imagination, but not one that I will probably seek out again. (2,637 characters)

Photo of bobhits
3.4/5  rDev -15.8%
look: 2 | smell: 4.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

Smoke is an odd smell in beers. They come off as a strong sour note at the top without much sweetness. Clear alcohol notes are in there. The roasted malt is there at the finish, Perhaps a touch of liquorish with a hint of coffee in the nose. I want to say vanilla and chocolate but I don't think those are in there. I'm mostly picking up the alcohol, smoke, liquorish, and some coffee.

Pours brown, turns black in the glass, with good head, great retention, and just enough body. Impressive to say the least.

Beers like this make me wish I knew more from those taste wheels. The malt isn't sweet or sour, the flavor hits the front of the tongue which indicates not sour, but the smoke is clearly a very unique flavor for the malt. Clear notes of chocolate (very much on the dark bitter bakers chocolate side, even more than most), coffee. There isn't any sweet notes in this beer. I think it would be amazing with sweeter foods, but I have nothing like that to try with it. I can vouch form past experience that this stuff is just amazing with roast chicken and BBQ. A rare thing with beer is that imo this is far better with food than by itself. I highly recommend pairing this with food.

Great carbonation gives this beer a lot of drink ability and a creamy mouth feel. That said it's a touch to thin all things considered.

I think stone for this very "unstone like" beer. It's a very different porter and a truly interesting experience. Scored as an alone drink and not as something to pair with food. Scores would go up in taste to with the right pairing. By itself this is very interesting but doesn't rank that highly. (1,631 characters)

Photo of edskirk3
3.39/5  rDev -16.1%
look: 5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4.5 | overall: 3

I had this on tap two weeks ago and loved it. When I saw a bottle of Stone Smoked Porter the other day I of course had to bring it home.

The familiar Stone bomber, to be enjoyed by 02/27/07. It is now 05/04/07. I'm sure it's still good...

I'm decanting into a faceted mug. It pours a little like syrup and is just this side of opaque. There's a few ruby highlights in there. Delicious-looking beige head. Nice and creamy. Has a little staying power. Aroma of coffee and cocoa powder. Let the imbibing begin...

Comes off a tad bitter, actually. As in coffee bitterness. Maybe I should pay attention to those freshness dates. It's not undrinkable, just... disappointing.

The coffee bitterness comes in right at tongue contact and lingers for a good while. I'm not picking up any smokiness. The roasted malts have become borderline astringent at this point. The mouthfeel, however, is still holding up. Full, creamy, sticky. Nourishing, in the same way as a Snickers bar. The back of the bottle suggests pairing with a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. I would totally do that if I had some peanut butter on hand, even with this less-than-fresh bottle.

I've come to have high expectations for Stone, and even if this one is post-dated, it's still good. (1,264 characters)

Photo of devilben02
3.39/5  rDev -16.1%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 4 | feel: 2 | overall: 3

Pours from the bottle with a deep, nearly opaque black/brown color and generates a foamy sand-colored head. The aroma is disappointingly subtle, with only a bit of milk chocolate and weak coffee being discerned. The flavor is more what I had hoped for, with some soft, woody smoke, chocolate, and a bit of spicy, herbal hops for balance. The mouthfeel detracts from the varied flavor profile, with a fine, fizzy carbonation that borders on unpleasant. Overall, this is a fine porter with a bit of extra character, but it is is sadly subtle. (540 characters)

Photo of JamesMN
3.39/5  rDev -16.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.25 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Enjoy by *gasp* 12/15/12. I've literally had this bottle in my fridge for about two and a half years. I bought it when I first got serious about reviewing and I have no idea why it's taken this long to do so.

Appearance: Dark brown body with about half a finger of sudsy tan foam that has dissipated leaving lacing.

Aroma: Quite clean. Some cream and hints of woody smoke. I would think the smokey flavor, if any is left, would be very mild by now.

Taste: If I didn't know this was as old a bottle as it is, I probably wouldn't guess it. Let's talk hops first: they are quite aggressive. The first thing I notice is a building bitterness that hits its peak during the finish. There really isn't much for hop flavor but the character is all clean bitterness. The malt takes a back seat until the aftertaste when flavors of roasted barley and cream take over. The smoked malt flavor comes through at the beginning of each sip and then again in the aftertaste, but it is subtle. Nice depth of flavor for 5.9% ABV.

Mouthfeel: Between thin and medium in body, which is lighter than expected. The carbonation is a little overdone. Good drinkability for the style.

Final Thoughts: I was pretty nervous cracking this bomber open but the beer inside has aged well. Would I drink it again? Sure, next time I won't let it age. (1,320 characters)

Photo of BMMillsy
3.39/5  rDev -16.1%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.25 | overall: 3.5

Falls flat for me. Not a bad beer, but lacking in flavor. Pours a dark brown to black, ruby on the edges, with a small white head. Aroma is rather bland, with only slight evidence of roast or smoke, not much else to detect. Flavor continues with very little chocolate or coffee flavor, a bit watered down in flavor. Cant get much of the smoke here. Palate is thin for what I expected to be a bold porter and the great things I heard. Just okay for me, and wish this had a bit more flavor to it. (494 characters)

Photo of CortexBomb
3.38/5  rDev -16.3%
look: 4 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Jet black on the pour, huge off white head on top, impressive looking. The smell is rausch-like, clear smoked malty notes.

The flavour on this is lightly roasted, and chocolatey for a porter, with a vague smoky tone in the background. Not as much smoke as I was expecting, but all told it's a tasty porter, though without the smoke hint to add some zing it would not be above average.

The mouthfeel, decent. It's moderately full bodied. The drinkability, nothing particularly special. For a smoked beer it's easy to drink, but that's only because the smoke isn't overly aggressive here.

The bottom line: Don't buy one of these expecting Rausch Porter, because you'll be disappointed. Stone has crafted a fairly average porter, and then added a hint of smoke to it. The end result is drinkable, tasty, and probably would make a damn fine pairing with some BBQ ribs, but it's not going to blow you away. (905 characters)

Photo of DrinkThemAll
3.38/5  rDev -16.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Poured from a 22oz bomber into my stone pint glass...

A- Poured almost black with a slight red hue coming through the
bottom, had about a 2 finger frothy tan head that dissipates to about half a head with nice lacing...

S-Very sweet malts with some chocolate and some espresso, a bit smokey as well but very subtle on any smoke, maybe some molasses as well

T-Very sweet malts up front very bitter and balanced, has nice chocolate and espresso notes as well a nice smokey roasted nutty plum finish, lingering syrup as well...

M-Medium body high carbonation, the smoked part comes out alot in the mouth nice and bitter with chocolate

O-Decent porter, not as smokey as I would have hoped for but
good and cheap...no super wow factor here just a good brew... (762 characters)

Photo of matty
3.38/5  rDev -16.3%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

Dark brown colored beer with a slowly fading head.Aroma is smoky malts.Taste is smoked malts,coffee and some chocolate.A pretty decent beer with some decent flavor.A good beer that I most likely would try again although I would not actively seek out.I think you should try this at least once. (292 characters)

Photo of beertaster13
3.38/5  rDev -16.3%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

I love Stone offerings as much as the next guy but the smoked porter did not do my tastebuds justice. It is a good beer but from Stone you expect incredible with a capital I. Pours a ruby dark color with a creamy head that grows to an astonishing level. The smell is of roasted malts and mocha roast, smokiness. Taste is where it fell off the charts, hint of mocha and cream but not as full bodies as I would have liked, lighter than expected. Feels light in the mouth, un appealing. Drinkable for a nice meal but not that dessert beer I hoped for that is a meal of its own. (574 characters)

Photo of altgeeky1
3.36/5  rDev -16.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 4

22 oz bottle comes painted directly on the glass, which has to be a considerable expense compared to laminate or paper labels. Unusual in that respect, I had high expectations somewhere in the realm of Samuel Smith products.

Bottle opened at 58F, served in a standard pint glass. Very dark, almost opaque, and not a lot of pour head at first but settles down to a decent remainder head level.

Smells malty chocolate. I double checked the label, it did say smoked porter.. hmm. Expecting a smoked porter but found no such aroma, was disappointed in that regard. Not much aroma hops.

Tastes as it smells: chocolate malty porter, not too sweet or heavy, hops are there but not heavy, and lacking much in the way of smoke. I will add that the taste of this beer IS good. If this were my creation, I would have got some feedback before choosing the name before painting the bottles. [grin]. Not much body hops, or if they are there they take a back seat to the chocolate finish. Well balanced. Tastes better as it gets warmer ~60 to 65F.

Mouthfeel is great for the style, a well bodied beer that is not as filling as it looks.

Drinkability is excellent despite the small negatives. This would be a good gateway beer for someone trying darker sweeter beers, or as a session beer.

Purchased 3 weeks prior to review from Wine Society, Nashua NH. (1,348 characters)

Photo of notchucknorris
3.36/5  rDev -16.8%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 3

A: Very dark brown with some chestnut hints on the edges.

S: A huge smoky smell along with some roasted malts.

T: Luckily, the flavors in this one go way beyond the smoky smell. Slight malty sweetness, then bitter dark chocolate and coffee flavors. On the finish, a hint of hops and dark fruit. Throughout the taste, a lot of smoke that almost tastes like smoked meat. It's almost like the smell that you get in your hair when you sleep too close to a campfire. It's not a bad beer, but probably my least favorite of the stone year-rounds. Probably not one I'll go near again any time soon. (592 characters)

Photo of TheCondor
3.35/5  rDev -17.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Poured from the pint bottle into a pint glass.

Appearance – Pours a deep brown almost black color with a slight amber hue to it. A decent sized head came from an aggressive pour, but left rather quickly. Pretty fair lacing.

Smell – Smokiness, roasted malts, a little caramel and chocolate. Pretty nice nose on this one.

Taste – The flavoring is good, follows the nose to a degree. The smokiness certainly imparts flavors to the brew, which in my opinion actually interfere with what is otherwise an excellent beer. A slight sweetness, not much at all, but the taste overall is more on the bitter side. I just didn’t like the balance of the beer.

Mouthfeel – Medium bodied, medium well carbonation.

Overall – This is a good brew to some, but I am more of a fan of the traditional porters, so this one caught me off guard a little. This is a great beer to try once, and If you are a big fan of the smoked porters then it would be recommended, but otherwise, there are better out there. Certainly try it though, I'm just not real keen on the smoked flavoring. (1,073 characters)

Photo of DavoleBomb
3.35/5  rDev -17.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 3.5

Poured into a snifter.

3.5 A: A good bit of carbonation in this one. Black color. Three fingers of frothy/creamy light tan head. Retention is good and sparse irregular lacing is left.

3.5 S: I'm a bit disappointed with the amount of smoke in this. I expected something a bit more badass from Stone. Anyway, it still smells good. Chocolate with a moderate neutral malt sweetness. A touch of graininess. Smoke is subdued, but it does add a touch of bacon. If this was 10X stronger, it be damn good.

3.0 T: This is a well crafted brew, but it isn't very exciting. Subtle chocolate, subtle roast, and a subtler smoke. The strongest flavor is neutral malt sweetness.

4.0 M: Despite a medium body, this has a lot of creaminess. Good moderate carbonation. Very nice here.

3.5 D: Stone was one of my first loves, but ever since drinking the beers of hundreds of breweries, they don't seem too impressive anymore. Sometimes I wish I had an undeveloped palate again. In any case, this is a tasty, easy drinker. (1,005 characters)

Photo of IBUnit63
3.35/5  rDev -17.1%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Nice, sludgy motor oil look to it; decent head. Smoke scent is subdued; nothing overpowering here. The jerky-ish smoke is woven nicely throughout the malt, but again, the taste of malt and hops is a little subdued in this instance. Well-made stuff indeed, but not necessarily my thing. (285 characters)

Photo of Phyl21ca
3.33/5  rDev -17.6%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3.5

Bottle: Poured a medium-black color porter with a medium size foamy head with average retention. Aroma of slightly bitter hops with some very subtle smoke in there. Taste is also slightly bitter with a very subtle touch of smoke. I was honestly expecting a more smoky character because of the name of the beer. Also, I was expecting a hoppier porter based on previous tasting of Stone beers. A bit of letdown really. (416 characters)

Photo of loren01
3.33/5  rDev -17.6%
look: 4.5 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

A: Poured from bomber a reddish black color with a 2 finger width tannish frothy head
S: Smells pretty earthy, you can also easily pick up on the smoky aroma.
T: Tastes smoky, like how stuff BBQ'd with mesquite charcoal. Slight bitter aftertaste. Also some dark chocolate flavors.
M: Medium to heavy bodied.
D: Smell was nice, however the taste didn't do much for me really. Never been a fan of dark chocolate and there were a lot of the same flavors in this beer as are in dark chocolate. I've had better porters, but overall not too bad, something different than the norm. (580 characters)

Photo of SpeedwayJim
3.32/5  rDev -17.8%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3.5

22oz. bomber into a Cigar City snifter. Shared with schen9303. Side-by-side with the vanilla and Chipotle versions.

Opaue black but thin beer. .5 finger light cream head with poor retention. Spotty lace with no cling. Not much to this one.

Roasted malt, liquorice, smoke, and maybe some bitter chocolate. Some mild creaminess ties this one together. Average.

Opens liquorice, smoked malt, peat, chocolate, and some cocoa at the end. Bit of lactose tartness at the finish. Roasty aftertaste. Decent.

Light bodied with moderate to ample carbonation. Prickly and bubbly in the mouth and crisp going down. Accented finish with a slight lingering aftertaste. Refreshing though I'd prefer a bit smoother.

Solid. Overall a nice beer and one that I can see being a good base to add components to. This one's not gonna blow you away but its a good baseline of what a porter should be. (883 characters)

Photo of pants678
3.32/5  rDev -17.8%
look: 3 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 3.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 3

Picked up a 22oz of this one for the big game to enjoy with a meal of bratwurst and sauerkraut. Poured very dark, close to black with a lightly tanned head. The unique smoke flavor doesn't seem to apparent immediately, but it is there if you hold for a moment. It's also in the after-taste. The smoke is strong but not overpowering, however, this is the only aspect I found original about this porter. Normal texture, tastes of coffee and fairly smooth. Otherwise seemed like a fairly standard, albeit, well made porter. This won't be a preference, I think. (557 characters)

Photo of BeerBelcher
3.3/5  rDev -18.3%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 3 | feel: 4 | overall: 4

I thought this was a decent tasting beer and a good porter, but pretty marginal in its smoked component compared to other smoked porter's I've had (Alaskan) or rachbiers.

This beer poured a slightly thick black, with a pretty abundant off-white head. Aroma was pretty minimal, but offered up some nice chocolate malt (burned pizza crust) roastiness. Flavor was decently roasty, but not very smokey to my palate (although other folks I split the bottle with disagreed). Mouthfeel was unremarkable.

Not a bad beer, but I wasn't hugely impressed by it. Definitely recommended though. (582 characters)

Photo of osusullins
3.29/5  rDev -18.6%
look: 3 | smell: 4 | taste: 3 | feel: 3.5 | overall: 3

Sampled a bottle poured into a pint glass. Appearance is dark with thick, white head. The smell is very smokey with a hint of toffee and malt. The smoke is very dominant in the taste of this beer which is what you want in a smoked porter, however there seems to be a lack of balance. There is a slight estery taste, but it is very subtle and is gone almost as soon as the palate detects it. As the beer warms in the glass the toffee starts to become more pronounced. This beer is good, however I can think of many smoked porters I would reach for before I grab this again. (572 characters)

Smoked Porter from Stone Brewing Co.
90 out of 100 based on 1,770 ratings.